Evidence mapPaperPMID 42015070Full record

Observational studyBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026

Rethinking urinary tract infections in women with abdominal pain in pregnancy: a prospective case-control study.

Jane L D Currie, Catherine P James, Jennifer L Rohn, Anna L David

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jane L D CurrieUCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, Medical School Building, 74 Huntley Street, London, WC1E 6AU, UK. jane.currie@uhbw.nhs.uk.
Catherine P JamesUCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, Medical School Building, 74 Huntley Street, London, WC1E 6AU, UK.
Jennifer L RohnDivision of Medicine, Department of Renal Medicine, University College London, 5 University Street, Rayne Building, London, WC1E 6JF, UK.
Anna L DavidUCL EGA Institute for Women's Health, Medical School Building, 74 Huntley Street, London, WC1E 6AU, UK.

Funding

Wellbeing of Women Wellbeing of Women and British Maternal and Fetal Medicine Entry-Level Scholarship
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAbdominal pain in pregnancy may be caused by urinary tract infection (UTI), which is associated with preterm birth and pyelonephritis. Standard urine culture is insensitive; alternative tests, previously studied in chronic UTI, may improve UTI diagnosis in pregnancy. We hypothesised that women with abdominal pain in pregnancy may have urinary pathology not detected by standard tests.

methodsThis single-centre, prospective case-control observational study compared patients presenting with abdominal pain after 14 weeks’ gestation, using both standard and alternative tests, against gestation-matched patients presenting with another non-abdominal pain acute problem, and asymptomatic patients attending routine antenatal care. Urine samples were a clean-catch midstream void. Standard tests were urinary dipstick, microscopy and culture. Alternative tests were: (1) objective symptoms inventory; (2) quality of life assessment (EQ-5D-5 L); (3) fresh unspun urine microscopy; (3) urinary ATP; (4) enhanced sediment culture; (5) urinary IL-6, IL-8 and lactoferrin; (6) urothelial cell analysis. Non-parametric statistical methods were used.

resultsPregnant women whether with abdominal pain (n = 50), other acute hospital presentations (n = 58) or attending routine antenatal care (n = 51), had symptoms of UTI with scores equivalent to those seen in patients with chronic UTI. Women presenting acutely with abdominal pain did have more pain symptoms, nocturia, and lower quality of life scores, with a different distribution of bacteria using enhanced urine culture, but they had equivalent rates of positive standard urine culture compared to those with no pain or those in routine antenatal care. Subsequently they were more likely to be diagnosed with a UTI and prescribed antibiotics. Urinary symptoms and markers of urinary pathology were prevalent in all groups, but different in those clinically diagnosed with UTI.

conclusionsOur study shows that current standard testing for UTI in pregnancy, and understanding of what is normal and abnormal, is inadequate. The use of alternative tests, well validated in a chronic UTI research programme, raises questions about current urine testing practice in pregnancy and the assumptions that drive them. Further research should examine these tests in different pregnancy contexts, to determine if they can enhance UTI diagnosis, better guide management of urine pathology in pregnancy and improve pregnancy outcomes.

Indexed as

Abdominal PainPregnancy Complications, InfectiousUrinary Tract InfectionsAdenosine TriphosphateAdultCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansInterleukin-6Interleukin-8PregnancyProspective StudiesQuality of LifeUrinalysisUrinary Sediment AnalysisYoung AdultAdenosine TriphosphateInterleukin-6Interleukin-8cytokinesmicrobiologypregnancyurinary cultureUrinary tract infectionurothelial cells

Identifiers

PMID42015070
PMCPMC13234975

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.